40 ms·
> Keep in mind "Ayn Rand" ended up in the public safety net for care. There’s no hypocrisy there. She paid into the system. Why shouldn’t she get as much value
by tt24 11mo ago
> Keep in mind "Ayn Rand" ended up in the public safety net for care.
There’s no hypocrisy there. She paid into the system. Why shouldn’t she get as much value out of it as possible?
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- DangitBobby 11mo ago[flagged]
- tt24 11mo agoThis comment doesn’t make any point that I haven’t already addressed in my reply to the parent comment. I’d recommend reading it a little more carefully before downvoting.
- Joel_Mckay 11mo agoWhile we disagree on Rands work, I do respect a reasoned opinion. I agree down-voting just makes people emotional, and doesn't add anything. Personally, I saw Rands writing as lazy thinly veiled fictional despotism, and targeted peoples need for simple answers in a chaotic world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion_of_control#By_proxy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion_of_control#By_proxy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randian_hero https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randian_hero This doesn't mean both perspectives can't seem true =3
- DangitBobby 11mo agoI didn't downvote you FWIW
- Joel_Mckay 11mo agoI was talking about your reply, as burying your comment was not polite. The Internet is a big place, and some people are always having a bad day. =3
- indubioprorubik 11mo ago[dead]
- teucris 11mo agoThe hypocrisy lies in the fact that the philosophy of Ayn Rand - that an elite few held up society and the rest were pretty much just parasites - has been used at great length to justify the gutting of social programs.
- lowbloodsugar 11mo agoAnd the gutting is done by the people she described as the parasites.
- almosthere 11mo agoShe believed that even wealthy kids that just live off their trust funds were parasites too. It was about consuming vs producing, not elite vs non-elite.
- Joel_Mckay 11mo agoIndeed, dehumanizing people shouldn't be the foundation of a logical argument. Have a wonderful day =3
- romanhn 11mo agoIt's pretty clear which group she would place Elon Musk into, probably the most Randian character out there.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- tt24 11mo agoPlease read my comment in good faith. There is no contradiction with Rand’s philosophy here. According to her framework, the state stole from her throughout her life. Using public assistance is merely retrieving a small piece of that stolen money.
- teucris 11mo ago
- surgical_fire 11mo agoPerhaps at that point she realized that her ideas were shit, and a system where you contribute to a public safety net is not a bad idea, it's what society is for. Or perhaps she was still a dense prick to the end of her days. Who knows?
- tt24 11mo agoThis doesn’t contribute very much to the discussion. Dang could we take a look at this one as well? Thank you!
- surgical_fire 11mo agoI disagree. I think it does contribute plenty. You are probably just butthurt at this ridiculous ideology being exposed for what it is.
- tt24 11mo ago1. I’m not an objectivist. 2. Looks like the comment I replied to is heavily downvoted and soon to be flagged. Seems like I’m not the only one that agrees that it doesn’t contribute. I expect a similar thing to happen to yours shortly as well.
- surgical_fire 11mo agoMy comments may be upvoted, downvoted, or ignored. Either outcome is meaningless. I'll worry about it when the bank accepts internet points as mortgage repayments.
- littlestymaar 11mo ago> She paid into the system. Why shouldn’t she get as much value out of it as possible? That's not how “the system” works though. She paid so other people could benefit from it, then when she benefited it, she became part of a scheme that took money from working people to give it to her: she become one of the parasites she hated in good years. I don't blame her for preferring hypocrisy to suicide, but it's still fair to call her hypocrisy for what it is.
- tt24 11mo agoIt’s not hypocrisy though, under her moral framework it’s merely partial recovery of stolen property. I think my comment explains this pretty clearly, I’d recommend reading it more carefully and in good faith before responding.
- littlestymaar 11mo ago> It’s not hypocrisy though, under her moral framework it’s merely partial recovery of stolen property. If you steal from some people make up for the loss that some other people inflicted on you, you're still a thieve no matter the moral framework. > I think my comment explains this pretty clearly, I’d recommend reading it more carefully and in good faith before responding. There's no bad faith on my side, your argument just ain't valid.
- tt24 11mo ago> If you steal from some people make up for the loss that some other people inflicted on you, you're still a thieve no matter the moral framework. She’s not, she’s stealing from the same entity that caused the loss - the state.
- littlestymaar 11mo agoExcept she isn't stealing the state in any way, the state is more than willing to give her back. If she's stealing someone, it's someone akin to her younger self whose work is taken away by the state to give her. Had she become a burglar, stealing directly from the senior public servants[1] houses, then it would have been somehow consistent. But I'm pretty sure she would still have agreed that this was theft and immoral. The reality is simple, at the end of her life, she simply couldn't afford to live in a way that matched her individualist ideology. [1]: because even though Rand claims she hates the State, it's pretty clear from the writing that her main personal issues are the civil servants themselves.